7

A semi-sated lower-class Roman stands in front of the pantry and mutters to themselves: "What else could I eat?"

What would be the most natural or idiomatic way of expressing this sentiment?

What I've found so far: "Quid aliud edam?" or "Quid nunc edam?" or "Nunc quid edam?"

4
  • 1
    This is a very interesting question. When I first read quid aliud edam I read it as, "what else would I eat?" As in, "of course it's food! What else would I eat?" But you want it to mean, "what else is there to eat?" I'm not sure it can mean that, but I'm also not sure it can't either. Very thought provoking.
    – Figulus
    Jan 24 at 0:33
  • 1
    Thanks @Figulus, you're confirming my suspicion that quid aliud may be read as a rhetorical question. Here I am definitely looking for a true question, as you understood well.
    – Roman
    Jan 24 at 11:44
  • I still can't say that quid aliud edam is wrong, but I wonder whether quid plus edam might be better, or quae plura edam?
    – Figulus
    Jan 26 at 4:33
  • Caseum Hollandicum edam, nonne?
    – Colin Fine
    Jan 29 at 18:07

1 Answer 1

5

I've been pondering this for a while, and I turned to Traupman for advice.

Under else in the English-to-Latin section of his dictionary, Traupman gives aliquid amplius for anything else.

So I'll suggest Quid amplius edam for what else can I eat.

3
  • 2
    I agree with this, with the elaboration that "quid amplius" means "what in addition", whereas "quid aliud" means "what other than [some contextually understood reference point]". Either could be correct for a given context, but quid amplius sounds right here. Jan 27 at 21:35
  • 1
    @Figulus: Is "quid amplius edam" an indirect question? For, "What is there to eat?", a present subjunctive passive, giving: "quid aliud edatur?" = "What else may be eaten?". Is this correct?
    – tony
    Jan 31 at 9:04
  • @tony I'm not sure the subjunctive is an indirect question, I'd rather call it a deliberative. But then I'm not so sure the line between deliberatives and indirect questions is necessarily very thick.
    – Figulus
    Feb 2 at 1:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.